By Michael E. Miller
By Ryan Yousefi
By Kyle Munzenrieder
By Sabrina Rodriguez
By Michael E. Miller
By Carlos Suarez De Jesus
By Luther Campbell
By Kyle Munzenrieder
More subtly, though, the story was also a tribute to BrandsMart's ability to manipulate the Herald into giving it free publicity and bully its reporter into making sure that only the most positive aspects of the company's history were highlighted.
Matas refused to comment for this story, but according to several Herald sources, the article was the idea of the paper's executive editor Doug Clifton. While it is certainly Clifton's prerogative to assign stories and dictate coverage, his involvement in a business-related article was unusual, reporters say, because Clifton doesn't normally involve himself in the day-to-day operation of the paper's business section.
Initially, Matas thought that the store's opening merited only a brief notice toward the bottom of the business page. That plan was scrapped, according to those familiar with the decision, because both Matas and Herald business editor Beatrice Garcia believed Clifton would not be satisfied with a mention and would want the story featured more prominently.
When Matas interviewed Perlman for the story, additional problems arose. Perlman apparently did not like the types of questions posed by Matas, especially the one about his father's conviction for tax evasion. Robert Perlman, BrandsMart's founder, pleaded guilty to defrauding the government and was sentenced earlier this year to ten months in prison. A judge also ordered him to pay $6.7 million in back taxes and penalties.
According to Clifton, Matas asked Perlman if the adverse publicity from his father's conviction had any effect on the business. Perlman reportedly went ballistic and told her that he didn't want any mention of the tax charge to appear in the paper. He blustered that his company had spent a fortune on ads in the Herald to promote the opening of the Palmetto store and was now afraid that Matas's story would spoil everything. Then he hung up on her. (Perlman did not return calls seeking his comment for this story.)
Perlman immediately called Herald president Joe Natoli, who in turn called the executive editor. "Perlman was upset, so he called Natoli to complain, which is perfectly within his rights," says Clifton. "People do it all the time. And then Natoli talked to me."
Clifton says he agreed with Perlman that there was no justification for bringing up the tax evasion issue during either the interview or to include it as part of the story itself. "I didn't think it was appropriate to deal with the IRS issue," he argues. "It was extraneous and it didn't have any bearing on the story we were doing."
As a result the Herald story made no mention of Robert Perlman being a tax cheat. However, Clifton's stance on the tax evasion issue had repercussions. It angered Herald employees, many of whom believe that the only reason the paper wrote the BrandsMart story was to appease a major advertiser. "Apparently BrandsMart is such a huge gravy train that even the Herald's executive editor has deemed them a sacred cow," says one Herald reporter. "It's pretty outrageous and will have a chilling effect on the staff. How are we to know how to approach a story about another major advertiser? How will we know what questions Doug Clifton will consider appropriate for us to ask and which ones we'll be criticized for asking?"
This is the second time this year Herald executives have provided cover for BrandsMart. In March New Times reported that Herald president Natoli wrote a letter of support to U.S. District Court Judge Jose Gonzalez on behalf of Robert Perlman just prior to his sentencing on the tax charge.
Indeed, if Matas and the Herald were truly interested in exploring all of the ways that BrandsMart has been able to thrive while its competitors have struggled, Robert Perlman's federal court file would have made interesting background reading. Federal prosecutors alleged that the level of fraud Perlman committed far exceeded mere tax evasion. "From the inception of this tax investigation, the United States has obtained conclusive and overwhelming evidence that the defendant in this case has committed numerous other fraudulent schemes while owning and operating BrandsMart," federal prosecutors wrote in a memorandum filed last year.
In one of those schemes, they alleged, Robert Perlman swindled tens of thousands of dollars from various electronics companies, including Sony, Panasonic, and General Electric. Because their products are featured in BrandsMart ads, those companies had all signed contracts agreeing to reimburse the electronics and appliance chain for a portion of its advertising costs. Prosecutors claimed that BrandsMart officials inflated the advertising costs in order to collect bigger reimbursements from the manufacturers.